"1. Where was the "word of God" in English before 1611?
2. If there was a "word of God" in English before 1611, what was the need for the KJV?
3. In which edition of the KJV are the promises for preservation fulfilled? Remember, there are still typos and differences in the KJV. Which one is 100% right?
4. IF God did inspire the KJV, why did he allow so many errors which needed to be revised?
5. Why did God include the apocrypha in the KJV1611? Why did he include the translators preface, which clearly did not agree with KJVO? Why did he include the margin notes? Couldnt he have made sure these were not included?
6. If the KJV is word-for-word inspired, why would italics be necessary?
7. Why must the "word of God" in English be found in one volume? Does any verse of scripture say that it should?"
1. Has no one answered these questions here on the board for you(as you stated, unless I misread your statement)? As you know, there is a difference between being provided an answer, and accepting an answer, i.e., you may not like an answer to your/an argument, but that is not equivalent to contending that the question has not been answered. Please clarify.
No one has answered this without opening up a massive hole in the KJVO doctrine. When this happens, and they are shown, they run and hide, usually with their normal tantrum. If you ask me what state Dallas is in, and I answer Texas, and then you ask me the same of Austin, and I say Florida, then you ask if Austin and Dallas are in the same state and I say yes, then I have answered all of your questions, but my answers CONFLICT with either another answer I have given, or with common sense, or with KNOWN, UNDISPUTED FACTS. This is what has happened.
2.You are on record as stating that there is "no english translation that is WORD FOR WORD without any deviation perfect". Notice, you said, "it has not been produced", and you "demand a 100% perfect bible"(English, I assume). My questions:
-Do you accept/belief the Holy Bible's own internal testimony that the LORD God has promised to preserve His word without error, irrespective of the language preserved?
I believe in all scripture, but if you add your interpretation to it, then I am not bound by that. If you wish to reject the evidence regarding Psalms 12, then that is your problem. I do accept scripture, rightly divided.
-assuming you do accept this, what evidence would you demand(your words) of me to "prove" that the KJB is the inspired, preserved, perfect word of God for English speaking people? After all, you said: "You are asking us to believe in KJVO, without any shread of proof."/"where did God choose the KJV"
Scripture which states that I must believe God's inerrant words must be found in one volume, any evidence that manuscripts which disagree with the KJV have been intentionally altered, and basically a plain reason response to my 7 questions without tearing a hole in the KJVO doctrine, or contradicting known facts.
-assuming you have provided me the required/demanded standard of proof/evidence, will you agree to provide /adhere to the same standard of proof/evidence you require of me, substantiating your belief in what you consider is the inspired, preserved, perfect(inerrant in your words) word of God, in whatever form it might be ?
Yes, I will.
3. You state: "There are some truth which we hold cannot be avoided if one is to be called christian.Gods word(original autographs)(my emphasis) is inerrant, etc" My questions:
-can you prove, given the preceding statement"(Original Autographs Only"-"OAO" , using the same standard of proof/evidence you demand of me, that there was an infallible original manuscript?
By definition, if they are God Breathed, then they are without error, because God cannot make an error. If he could, then how could he claim to be holy? The original autographs are inerrant because of the definition of God, provided by himself.
-if you found this original manuscript, how would you know it was the original manuscript?
I wouldnt. There is a reason why they no longer exist. This has been explained, and I am sure you understand it.
They would be worshiped and fought over.
-are you saying that those who do not accept the doctrine of "Gods word(original autographs)(my emphasis) is inerrant", i.e., only the originals are inerrant, are not Christian?
No, I would say you are very confused, and you have no idea what God says about himself and his actions. I definitely would not consider you to be a defender of God's words if you claim they are faulty from the start.
-If OAO is true, and one accepts OAO, then how is this not "idolatry"(see 4 below)?
I am not OAO, so I wouldnt know.
4. You said: "KJVO is idolatry. Have the guts to admit it."
My question:If you eventually are persuaded that the KJB is the word of God for English speaking people, would KJVO be idolatry? In other words, if someone where to be persuaded that they have "found" the perfect word of God in a book, that it was "produced", would acceptance of this book be considered idolatry, and why?
No, if it was true, and if there was any evidence, then it would not. However, even one of your prophets, DA Waite, admitted that there is no evidence. It is all by faith. If you have something he was ignorant of, then by all means, let it be known!
5. You stated previously:"Are you claiming that God was personally overshadowing these copyists? I wouldnt think so."
My question: Do you hold to the position that God did not "overshadow" these copyists?
No, I do not think he did in the way others here seem to be implying. I believe God allowed variants in the manuscripts so that we would have to seek out his word, and do our own research. This is why he did away with the priesthood in its former state. Each believer is now subject to GOD on his OWN, not because of what someone else told him/her.
6. You state/ask: "My question is, if God really wanted things done this way, why would he include so many proofs and so much evidence for EVERYTHING he claimed?"/"Why did God fail to preserve His perfect translation from typos/printing errors?"/" IF God did inspire the KJV, why did he allow so many errors which needed to be revised?"
-Are you claiming the LORD God is "illogical" for what He did do? And notice I am not asking for your speculation, your opinion, of what He should have done-I am asking, based on the implication of your statement/question, is He illogical for what He did do?
No, I am saying according to YOUR view, he would be completely contradcting himself. Why would God want everything to be accepted by faith and then claim that no one can deny him because of the EVIDENCE of creation? That would make him a liar. It seems you are trying to change the meaning. I believe you understood just fine.
-You state only the "originals" are inerrant. Based upon the above, assuming your premise above is sound(if I understand it correctly), I would ask:
-Using your "logic", why did the LORD God take over 1500 years to have His innerant word, "the originals", in the "original languages", be assembled in the first place?
No idea. That matters not to either of our beliefs here. We are talking about inspiring ERRORS, as you seem to (and others have claimed) that the original autographs contained errors.
-Simarlily, using your "logic", since you ask "Why did God fail to preserve His perfect translation from typos/printing errors?", why did he not preserve the "originals"?-they are long gone.
He believe he did preserve those words, just not in the same way you do.
You have not answered my questions as yet, and yet you hypocritically continue to rant/rave/complain, even in this most recent post, "Faith or Proof", about us not answering your questions! The hypocrisy mounts further, as you evidently had "time" to post in other threads since my 11/15 questions to you, including this thread!
This is quite foolish. Your was much longer, and I forgot about this one, I didnt refuse to answer your questions because they might be difficult. If you fail to understand this fact, then you have issues.
Sir, I would advise henceforth, if you want to assert that you are credible, that you cease from this "no one is answering me/stop insulting me" charade.
I am in no charade, and I couldnt care less about my credibility among those here. I would care more about my credibility among those on death row.
I see too much of this in the secular world on talk shows(not debates)-"I am a victim....I am misunderstood...You are so mean-spirited by your insults.....blah blah blah."
I never whined. I said what I had to say, and I was done. However, you are rather foolish if you think that KJVO are not the FIRST to whine when they are questioned. You really have NO CLUE about others here and their actions on other boards, do you? This above statement of yours was posted in much ignorance.
This does little to advance your argument.
I was unaware that I attempted to advance my arguement in said post.
You sound merely like a little kid with his hands caught in the proverbial cookie jar.
Do I? What have I been caught with? Questions that KJVO repeated avoid and REFUSE to answer? Notice, I didnt say FORGET, or MISS, REFUSE to answer.
Quit acting like a kid.
A kid? Quit adding to God's word.
Or as Paul so adeptly phrased it:
"...quit you like men...." 1 Corinthians 16:13
(you'll probably correct/revise the above)
Why must you constantly show your ignorance?
That is, grow up and act like a man, not a "cry baby."
From a man who adds to the word saying that God wants us to call others names, these words are worthless.
Should you continue on with this hypocritical mind set, since you state you are a poker player, as am I, I will "call you on this" every time. Learn when to fold.
Well, I seem to be doing just fine there. And when you show that you have a better hand, instead of just claiming you do and never showing, I will fold. Til then, you are just shouting at the rain.
John M. Whalen
Hopefully, this was true. That would be a first.
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose" - Jim Elliott, martyred in Quito, Ecuador 1956